I'm bisexual, and out of my experience I'd say the vast majority is at least a little bisexual. And any deviation from that we see in humans is purely cultural and neither found in nature or even necessarily in pre-abrahamic cultures, or non-abrahamic cultures before they where influenced by abrahamic cultures.
The whole monosexuality thing has to do with culture more then anything. Both the taint of abrahamic religions and the idea of monogamy. Neither of which I support.
I also think you cannot compare sexual orientation to religious views or lack there of.
Whatever gender someone prefers strongest is likely largely genetic or related to other natural circumstances. Whereas religious ideas or lack there of are formed via cognitive processes.
As for the stereotype about bisexuals I hate most... there are two.
One is that we'd be confused. I am not, I just might be attracted to either guys or girls. And had crushes and relationships and everything with both.
And second is that we are promiscuous. The most promiscous people I know where all monosexuals, and largely people identifying as straight to boot, easily. I'm actually picky as hell. Most don't rate to me.
As a proposal she uses the model of a modius strip for describing sexuality. As oposed to the scale or grid which has heterosexual and homosexual on both extremes with the question if there is a middle or not.
I came here by a google search (on marjorie garber) and just wanted to comment on your perception of Marjorie Garbers viewpoint that most if not everyone is bisexual. I do not think this is her viewpoint. In fact the book she wrote has more to do with the statement that bisexuality shows the (inevitable?) failure of this categorization (at least the categorization by exclusion).
I understand the meaning of the word agnostic. I am well aware that agnosticism is a epistemic position and not a middle ground between atheism and theism. The term "sexual agnosticism" was coined by me only as an analogy to compare two different ideas. Although I'm glad someone decided to point that out.
Like most gay people, I can't say that I know any "true" bisexuals. OK, so I get that not every bisexual is going to be equally attracted, or that every bisexual will function in society openly and without excuse or reason to be in the closet, but in all these years you would think I would meet ONE 50-50 bisexual, one gender indifferent. Usually? It's guys who like having a girlfriend or wife who also like getting fucked and/or the sneakiness of the thing.
Personal experience means zilch where you have an unknown, unmeasurable section of the population that remains invisible precisely because of the stigmas attributed to them. Those bisexuals who don't mind being seen as lascivious will probably be quite open about their bisexuality. As such it isn't surprising that you encounter a dispropotionate number of them. But some, when asked, will simply say "I'm gay" or "I'm straight" to avoid the issue. There's no way of knowing what proportion do this.
A more dramatic analogy would be the way people typically viewed homosexuals when sodomy was illegal. Those that came into the public eye were often, obviously not always but often, the more promiscuous, violent and perverse: rapists, exhibitionists etc. So people developed the idea that gays were rampantly, violently and compulsively driven by sexual desire without any measure or concept of the vast majority, who where not like this and managed to remain hidden because of it.
Voice only videos tend not to attract viewers for some reason. After all, who wouldn't want to put his face out there for a bunch of teenagers (from 12 to 80) to make stupid remarks about, which have nothing to do with the POV or content?
I have noticed this also, and I guess it makes sense that audio-only videos would attract less attention. I suppose it's a bit dull staring at an unmoving screen for five minutes, listening to some guy talk about life.
Everyone is bisexual, no one is totally heterosexual and no one is totally homosexual.
MrJohnboy1984 6 months ago
I'm bisexual, and out of my experience I'd say the vast majority is at least a little bisexual. And any deviation from that we see in humans is purely cultural and neither found in nature or even necessarily in pre-abrahamic cultures, or non-abrahamic cultures before they where influenced by abrahamic cultures.
The whole monosexuality thing has to do with culture more then anything. Both the taint of abrahamic religions and the idea of monogamy. Neither of which I support.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
@Shavarnarak
I also think you cannot compare sexual orientation to religious views or lack there of.
Whatever gender someone prefers strongest is likely largely genetic or related to other natural circumstances. Whereas religious ideas or lack there of are formed via cognitive processes.
Simply put, sex is nature, beliefs are nurture.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
@Shavarnarak
As for the stereotype about bisexuals I hate most... there are two.
One is that we'd be confused. I am not, I just might be attracted to either guys or girls. And had crushes and relationships and everything with both.
And second is that we are promiscuous. The most promiscous people I know where all monosexuals, and largely people identifying as straight to boot, easily. I'm actually picky as hell. Most don't rate to me.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
... continued... ^^
As a proposal she uses the model of a modius strip for describing sexuality. As oposed to the scale or grid which has heterosexual and homosexual on both extremes with the question if there is a middle or not.
plasticdingetje 1 year ago
Ah, thank you for clarifying.
TheNeonSkylight 1 year ago
I came here by a google search (on marjorie garber) and just wanted to comment on your perception of Marjorie Garbers viewpoint that most if not everyone is bisexual. I do not think this is her viewpoint. In fact the book she wrote has more to do with the statement that bisexuality shows the (inevitable?) failure of this categorization (at least the categorization by exclusion).
...
(Iam running out of charachters :P)
plasticdingetje 1 year ago
Another "almost-smart" guy who does not understand the meaning of words. Agnostic/Gnostic deals with KNOWLEDGE.
Atheist/Theist deals with BELIEF.
Agnostic is not some mid-point between Theist and Atheist. Agnostic means "I don't know, and I'm not likely to ever know."
I've got news for you, buddy. If you are not a theist, then you are (ARE) an atheist.
Your atheism can be backed by knowlege (Gnostic Atheist) or by non-belief (Agnostic Atheist). Theist or Atheist - it's either / or.
indignant99 1 year ago
I understand the meaning of the word agnostic. I am well aware that agnosticism is a epistemic position and not a middle ground between atheism and theism. The term "sexual agnosticism" was coined by me only as an analogy to compare two different ideas. Although I'm glad someone decided to point that out.
I am an agnostic atheist after all.
TheNeonSkylight 1 year ago
Like most gay people, I can't say that I know any "true" bisexuals. OK, so I get that not every bisexual is going to be equally attracted, or that every bisexual will function in society openly and without excuse or reason to be in the closet, but in all these years you would think I would meet ONE 50-50 bisexual, one gender indifferent. Usually? It's guys who like having a girlfriend or wife who also like getting fucked and/or the sneakiness of the thing.
Don't bitch at me, just tell your side
Gulfporter 1 year ago
Personal experience means zilch where you have an unknown, unmeasurable section of the population that remains invisible precisely because of the stigmas attributed to them. Those bisexuals who don't mind being seen as lascivious will probably be quite open about their bisexuality. As such it isn't surprising that you encounter a dispropotionate number of them. But some, when asked, will simply say "I'm gay" or "I'm straight" to avoid the issue. There's no way of knowing what proportion do this.
Keausindrome 1 year ago 2
A more dramatic analogy would be the way people typically viewed homosexuals when sodomy was illegal. Those that came into the public eye were often, obviously not always but often, the more promiscuous, violent and perverse: rapists, exhibitionists etc. So people developed the idea that gays were rampantly, violently and compulsively driven by sexual desire without any measure or concept of the vast majority, who where not like this and managed to remain hidden because of it.
Keausindrome 1 year ago 2
Thank you for the feedback. ^^
TheNeonSkylight 1 year ago
u need more viewers man i like your videos. you are the first atheist ive subscribed to.
dtadeo2006 1 year ago
@dtadeo2006
Voice only videos tend not to attract viewers for some reason. After all, who wouldn't want to put his face out there for a bunch of teenagers (from 12 to 80) to make stupid remarks about, which have nothing to do with the POV or content?
Gulfporter 1 year ago
I have noticed this also, and I guess it makes sense that audio-only videos would attract less attention. I suppose it's a bit dull staring at an unmoving screen for five minutes, listening to some guy talk about life.
TheNeonSkylight 1 year ago
Aha, thank you for the compliment. ^^
TheNeonSkylight 1 year ago